271

The role of gender in workplace stress: Acritical literature review

Kristina Gyllensten1 and Stephen Palmer2

1Doctorate student, Department of Psychology, City University. 2Honorary Professor ofPsychology, City University, London.Correspondence to: Stephen Palmer, Honorary Professor of Psychology, City University,Northampton Square, London UK EC1V OHB. s.palmer-1@city.ac.uk

AbstractObjective The aim of this review was to evaluate research relating to therole of gender in the level of workplace stress. A further aim was to reviewliterature relating to stressors of particular relevance to working women.These stressors included, multiple roles, lack of career progress anddiscrimination and stereotyping.Design Systematic review.Method Major databases were searched in order to identify studiesinvestigating gender and workplace stress. A range of research designswere included and no restrictions were made on the basis of the

occupations of the participants.Results Much of the research indicated that women reported higher levelsof stress compared to men. However, several studies reported no differencebetween the genders. Furthermore, the evidence for the adverse effectsof multiple roles, lack of career progress and discrimination andstereotyping was inconsistent.Conclusion The current review concluded that the evidence regardingthe role of gender in workplace stress and stressors was inconsistent.Limitations of the research were highlighted and implications for practicewere discussed.

Key words: workplace stress, gender, stressors

Introduction

Workplace stressStress in the workplace is a major problem for both organisations and employees, and ithas been estimated that approximately 13.4 million working days in Britain is lost peryear due to stress, depression or anxiety’. According to the Health and Safety Executive

272

(HSE)’- stress is defined as ’the adverse reaction people have to excessive pressures orother types of demand placed on them’. Approaches to stress have distinguished betweenthe concepts of stressor and strain. Environmental factors that may function as sourcesof stress are called stressors, and the individual’s reaction to the stressors is called strain3.Transactional approaches to stress emphasise the transaction between the cognitiveand affective aspects of the individual and their environment4,5. A cognitive definitionof stress has been proposed by Palmer, Cooper & Thomas6 as ’stress occurs when the

perceived pressure exceeds your perceived ability to cope’ (p.2). The term stress hasbeen conceptualised in a variety of ways and this can lead to confusion regarding themeaning of the term’. The current review will use the stress/stressor terminologyemployed in the articles reviewed.

Gender and workplace stressResearch suggests that working is generally related to positive health for women8,9,IO,and men’. However, as noted previously, workplace stress is a major problem, and it hasbeen suggested that gender may be an important demographic characteristic to considerin the experience of stress&dquo;. While on the one hand it has been reported that there areno differences between women and men in relation to workplace stress12, it has alsobeen noted that there are differences in both stressors and the severity of stress betweenthe sexes9,13,14,15. It has been reported that although women and men are exposed to thesame stressors, women are also facing unique stressors’6°’3. Indeed, Hofboll, Geller &

Dunahooll suggest that it is important to consider the stressors that are unique to

employed women, as this can increase the understanding of the specific needs of workingwomen. This is particularly important according to Hofboll et all’ as several studieshave found that the provision of workplace support was more effective in reducingoccupational stress in men than in women8,18. Research has reported that women inparticular are exposed to the following stressors: multiple roles’9; lack of careerprogress 20 ; and discrimination and stereotyping2l,??.

First, the current review will present and evaluate research that has investigatedthe role of gender in the level of workplace stress. Second, it will present and evaluateresearch and theory concerning working women and the stressors of’multiple roles’,’lack of career progress’ and ’discrimination and stereotyping’. It is acknowledged thatmen also experience strain from particular stressors, but these will not be discussed inthe present review (for further information see Burke23). There have been several reviewsof the literature within this area but most of these were conducted during the1980S8,11,12,14 . A more recent review of the literature was focused on stress and female

managers 17. The literature in the current review includes evidence from previous reviews,from research studies and from theoretical accounts.

Limitations with current researchPrior to the review it is important to consider a number of limitations of the research in

273

this area. There has been a lack of research investigating women and workplace stress,and many studies of occupational stress have only included male participants 15,17,24Failure to incorporate women in the research has led to impairment of the accuracy ofconceptual models and research findings’. Consequently, it is not possible to draw firmconclusions regarding the role of gender in workplace stress as there is not yet enoughresearch’9. In addition, most of the research treats women as a homogenous group, andrarely includes analyses of race or socioeconomic differences. It has been argued that togain a clear picture of stressors it is important to disaggregate the population of womens.Unfortunately, there has also been a lack of research investigating stress among womenfrom ethnic minorities’-5. Most of the studies have used a cross-sectional design andcan therefore only provide a snapshot of work stress. Finally, most studies have measuredstress using self-report questionnaires. Although questionnaires are a useful inmeasuring stress, it has been argued that it is important to use objective outcomemeasures as a supplement to self-report measurements26.

Level of workplace stress

No difference between the gendersIn an analysis of psychological research on sex and gender Deaux 27 concluded that inmost research little variance is accounted for by sex. Martocchio & 0’LearylZ conducteda meta-analysis of fifteen studies that had examined gender differences in work stress,and they concluded that there are no gender differences in occupational stress. Theauthors pointed out that the research used in the analysis had several limitationsincluding lack of information on reliability and validity of the stress measures. It issuggested that these methodological shortcomings could have influenced the results ofthe analysis. Despite the methodological limitations Martocchio & 0’Leary’-’ (p.500)assert that ’the burden of proof does, however, now lie with those researchers thatsuggests that sex differences exist’.

The Bristol Stress and Health at Work Study 28 was a survey by the HSE of 17,000randomly selected people from Bristol electoral register. This study in particular isimportant to consider in more detail in the current review, as the findings should behighly valuable in terms of generalisation as it was based on a large randomised sampleof the UK population. It was found that approximately 20 per cent of the participantsreported high or extremely high levels of work stress28. The data on demographic andoccupational variables from this study was analysed further in a report by the HSE 21.Stress levels were divided up into two groups, high and low stress, and there were nosignificant differences between men and women overall. Moreover, there were nosignificant effects of gender in the various marital status groups (married/cohabiting,single, widowed/divorced/separated). The pattern of stress across all age groups wasvery similar for males and females. Regarding education, there were significantly moremales than females in the high stress group for employees without secondary school

274

academic qualifications, but there were no significant differences in the other educationalgroups. In addition, there were significantly more females than males in the high stressgroup for socioeconomic status group I, and the reverse was found in socioeconomic

group 111.2. It was also found that there were significantly more males than females inthe high stress group for the lowest salary group. For all other salary groups, however,there were significantly more females than males in the high stress group, and thispattern increased with rising salary Significantly more females than males in full-timeemployment were in the high stress category. Finally, no significant differences werefound between the genders for any of the various job categories. In conclusion, therewere no overall significant differences between the genders. Nevertheless, differenceswere found when the role of education, socioeconomic status and salary were furtheranalysed 21

A longitudinal cohort study investigated the effects of organisational downsizingon employees in a Finnish town 30 . The main outcome measure was records of sicknessabsence and data was collected before downsizing, during downsizing, and afterdownsizing. Participants were 764 municipal employees who remained in their jobsafter downsizing. One of the main findings was that sickness and absence was 2.17times higher after major downsizing than after minor downsizing. The relationshipbetween sickness absence and downsizing was not affected by sex. The methodology ofthe study had several strengths including the longitudinal design that allowed theemployees to be followed during the downsizing process. Another advantage was thatthe sickness absence data was collected from each organisation, and previous research&dquo;has found that this measure accurately reflects the health of employees&dquo;.

Spielberger & Reheiser 32 conducted a study with 1781 working adults, measuringgender differences in occupational stress using the Job Stress Survey (JSS) in Americanuniversity and corporate settings. The JSS is a reliable measure of stress and it is a usefultool to measure occupational stress as it investigates both the perceived severity and thefrequency of thirty stressors. The number of men and women were relatively equal,although, almost twice as many males were in the higher occupational groups, and overtwice as many females were in the lower occupational group. It was found that therewere no significant differences in the overall stress levels for the two genders, althoughoccupational level was highly significant with managerial/professional participantsreporting more frequency of the stressors compared to clerical/maintenance workers.However, Spielberger & Reheiser 32 reported several differences in the perceived severityand frequency of certain stressors. Antoniou, Davidson & Cooper&dquo; conducted a cross-sectional study investigating occupational stress, job satisfaction and health state injunior doctors on Athens, Greece. The participants consisted of 193 males and 162females, and the data was collected using the Occupational Stress Indicator (OSI)including 46 additional items covering work stressors associated with Greek doctors.No significant differences between the genders were found in relation to current state ofmental and physical health, and three stressors, ’iniplications of mistakes’, (long working

275

hours’, and ’conflicting job tasks and demands’, were in the top five for both genders.However, females reported significantly higher levels of stress relating to the stressorsof career and achievement and home/work interface, whereas men reported significantlyhigher levels of job satisfaction33.

A cross-sectional Israeli study investigated stress and burnout in 657 male andfemale managers and human service professionals (57 per cent of them females) usinga self-report questionnaire 18 . No differences between males and females were found inlevels of stress at work, but women experienced higher levels of stress and burnout ingeneral life. An American exploratory study of gender and perceptions of work relatedstress was conducted by Di Salvo, Lubbers, Rossi, and Lewis34. A questionnaire measuringcritical incidents of stress was used and 85 females and 63 males, from four professionalorganisations, completed the questionnaires. The data was analysed using contentanalysis and no gender differences were found in the overall clusters and there were nosignificant differences between the genders in the ratings of severity. However, thefrequency and causes of stress differed between the genders in four out of the fourteencategories. Moreover, there may be some limitations with the validity of the analysis 34thus it is uncertain to what extent it is possible to generalise from the findings.

Difference between the gendersJick & Mitzi’ conducted a very well cited review of the empirical evidence of sexdifferences in stress. Nineteen studies were reviewed and in these studies women tended

to report higher levels of psychological distress than men. The authors suggest thatmen and women are likely to be exposed to different stressors, and that gender moderatesthe relationship between stressors, the appraisal of stressors and coping, and therelationship between coping and strain&dquo;. A further commonly sited review on genderand stress was conducted by Nelson & Quick 14 . The review comprised 99 different studiesdealing with the issues of research on women and research on workplace stress. It wasconcluded that women suffer from more workplace stress than men, because, as well asexperiencing stressors common to both genders women also experience certain uniquestressors. The specific stressors faced by women included discrimination, stereotyping,marriage/work interface, and social isolation 14 . Both these reviews strongly suggest thatgender plays an important role in level of workplace stress. However, it is important tonote that the reviews are almost 20 years old and that both reviews used a qualitativemethod for synthesising the evidence.

The Whitehall II study 31 was a longitudinal study of work related factors and illhealth in 10,308 civil servants in the UK. In the same way that The Bristol Stress and

Health at Work Study2l was important, The Whitehall II Study provides importantinformation about stress as it is a large scale longitudinal study with a large sample ofBritish employees. It was found that women in the two highest graded job categorieshad the highest level of problem drinkers. This relationship between occupational gradeand problem drinkers was not apparent in the male sample. According to the HSE31

276

national data also supports this finding. Level of psychiatric disorder, as measured bythe General Health Questionnaire, was higher in women than in men in five out of thesix occupational groups. High job demands and receiving low support were related toan increased risk of psychiatric disorder for both gendersj~. Bogg & Cooper 3-1 conducteda study, with 1051 British civil servants, in which gender differences in occupationalstress and strain were investigated. The OSI was used to measure job satisfaction, mentalhealth and physical health. It was found that the female participants were signiticantlymore job dissatisfied, and had poorer mental and physical health compared to the maleparticipants. They were also more concerned about their role at work, and the work andhome interface. The male participants were mainly affected by level of control at workand their achievement oriented behaviour35. A qualitative study investigated job stressin twelve managers in the English National Health Service 31. Semi-structured interviewswere used to collect the data and two core categories were found, ’the fit manager’ and‘the unfit manager’. It was further reported that female managers were more at riskfrom managerial stressors compared to male managers. The managers that were mostpsychologically fit used a combination of male and female attitudes and behaviours tocope with stress 36

An Australian cross-sectional study investigated stress, mental health, andleadership styles, in 60 female and 60 male managers in male and female dominatedindustries. Male dominated industries included academia, automotive industry, IT,accounting consultancies and the timber industry. Female dominated industries includedchildhood education, nursing and hair dressing. The female and male participants werenot matched. Job stress was measured using three scales from the Survey of WorkPressure and the GHQ was used to measure mental health. Women reported overallhigher levels of job stress than men, but did not experience worse mental health. Femalemanagers in male-dominated industries reported the greatest level of pressure fromdiscrimination. It is concluded that the gender and the gender ratio of the industryinfluence stress, leadership style and mental health among managers. The authorshighlight that the findings need to be replicated, and due to the small sample size thereare limitations as to the ability to generalise to other male and female dominatedindustries&dquo;. Davidson & Cooper&dquo; conducted a study investigating occupational stressin managers in various work sectors within the UK. Initially, 60 female managers wereinterviewed, and then 696 female managers and 185 male managers completed a stressquestionnaire, based on the findings from the interviews and previous research. Stressoutcomes were measured using the GHQ, drug use and job satisfaction. It was foundthat female managers reported higher levels of stress than male managers, and theyalso experienced higher pressure levels than men from the work, home/social andindividual arenas38. Davidson, Cooper & Baldini39 studied stress in 126 female and 220male graduate managers using the OSI. The female participants reported significantlyhigher scores on the seven subscales relating to sources of pressure compared to themale participants. The female managers were also more at risk of physical and mental

277

ill health and had lower job satisfaction scores. The authors conclude that the femalemanagers are under considerably more pressure than their male counterparts39.

A study investigated stress, job satisfaction and organisational climate in 2500medical practitioners and auxiliary personnel in Germany40. Job stress anddissatisfaction was measured using a 12-item questionnaire developed from previouswork by the authors. Participants were randomly selected from national listings and5000 were sent a questionnaire. It was reported that female doctors perceived higher

. levels of work stress compared to their male counterparts, and that female auxiliarypersonnel reported lower levels of stress compared to the male auxiliary personnel. Alimitation of the study that had an effect on the generalisability included a low responserate. Conversely, a great strength of the study was the large randomised national samplethat appeared to be relatively representative of the medical profession in Germany40 . Aquasi-experimental study investigated the effects of a mentoring programme for USmagistrate judges on stressors, strain and coping41. It was found that in both theexperimental (n=20) and control group (ii=17) the female participants reportedsignificantly higher levels of stressors and strain, measured by Osipow’s OccupationalStress Inventory-Revised, and significantly lower levels of coping skills compared tothe male participants. Because of the small sample size the results should be treatedwith caution41. These studies highlight the importance of considering occupationalgroups in workplace stress. Indeed, it has been found that characteristics of specificoccupations are important in stress’2.

Miller, Greyling, Cooper, Lu, Sparks & Spector’3 conducted a cross-cultural studyof occupational stress including participants from South Africa, UK, USA and Taiwan.The participants consisted of 822 managers and data was collected using the OSI-2.The interaction between country and gender was investigated but only a few significantdifferences were found. Considering the sample as a whole it was found that there weredifferences in strains, with females experiencing significantly lower levels ofpsychological and physical wellbeing compared to men. It was suggested that thisdifference could be a function of women being more willing to report or being moreaware of symptoms than men. Regarding experience of stressors only one significantdifference was found between the genders, with women experiencing more stress fromorganisational climate. The authors point out that a limitation of the findings is thatthey come from the combination of four different data sets. As almost no differencesbetween men and women were found on work stressors the authors concluded that the

research did not find support for gender differences in occupational stress43.Contrary to all of the previous studies presented in this section, which reported

higher levels of stress among women, a study conducted by Swanson, Power & Simpson‘~found that male medical doctors experienced more occupational stress and less jobsatisfaction than their female counterparts. In this study the Occupational StressInventory was completed by 547 Scottish general practitioners and 449 consultantdoctors, during a period when the Scottish Health Service was in the process of structural

278

changes. A strength of the study was that the sample was randomly selected from thenational register of GPs and consultants, and the responders were representative of GPsand consultants in Scotland. It should also be noted, as with all cross-sectional studies,that it only provides a snapshot of levels of occupational stress and job satisfaction44.Finally, it is important to note that this is the only study identified within the currentreview which reports higher stress levels among men than women. -

Sources of workplace stress - stressors

Multiple roles - -

As the numbers of dual-earner households are rising, the potential conflicts betweenthe demands of family and career are also increasing - these conflicts being welldocumented for both women and men45. Work and family conflict, as a stressor, hasbeen related to negative consequences including reduced life satisfaction, lower mentalhealth, and decreased productivity, and it is therefore of great concern for both

organisations and individuals46,47. Although, there have been big changes in familystructure and women’s labour force participation, there have been only minor changesin responsibility for domestic chores. Women continue to be responsible for the majorityof domestic chores and are therefore experiencing the stress of coping with a doubledayI7.48,49. Women are also more likely to take on other family-related roles such ascaring for elderly parents, and finding appropriate childcareI7,so.

Multiple roles as a stressorLangan-Fox 51 proposes that the more roles an individual is involved in, the higher thepotential for stress. According to Nelson & Burke 47 women are particularly likely tosuffer from role overload (conflicting demands from different roles). Nelson & Quick&dquo;conclude from their review of the literature, on stress and women, that the career-familyconflict is one of the main sources of stress for working women. Similarly, Davidson &

Cooper 18 found that female managers reported greater pressure than men from workand home stressors. McDonald & Korabik’6 investigated stressors and coping in 19 maleand 20 female managers in Canada. It was found that work and family interfaces weremore often sources of stress among the female participants than among the male.Although both the qualitative (description of stressful experiences) and quantitativemethods (work-stressor questionnaire) resulted in similar findings, the authors suggestthat the findings should be treated with caution due to the small sample size. In Davidsonet al’s3~ study it was found that female managers reported higher levels of stress on thehome/work interface compared to the male participants.

Greenglass, Pantony & Burkes2 conducted a study with 555 teachers investigatingthe relationship between work stress, social support and role conflict, the latter referringto the conflicting pressures from two or more sources. The role-conflict scales wereused and it was found that role conflict was significantly higher in women than in men,

279

and women had more role conflict between their work role and each family role. Theresults suggested that job stress was related to role conflict more often for women thanfor men52. An American study compared gender differences in the antecedents andconsequences of work-family con fliCt4l . The participants consisted of 109 women and131 men. To be included in the study the participants had to be married with somebodywho worked full-time, have children living at home, and be in a managerial orprofessional job. The data was collected by a survey instrument consisting of various

, standard scales investigating the following concepts: work and family involvement, workand family expectations, work and family conflict, role-strain, quality of work life, qualityof family life, and life satisfaction. Significant differences were noted in eleven out ofseventeen gender comparisons. It was found that it was more difficult for women thanfor men to achieve control over competing demands generated from the various roles. Itwas stated that ’professional women are expected to be committed to their work just likemen at the same time that they are normatively required to give priority to their familyroles&dquo;’ (p.71 ).

Mliltiple roles as a source of wellbeing The literature presented in the previous section suggests that multiple roles is a sourceof stress. However the effects of multiple roles are ambiguous and it has been suggestedthat multiple roles can be a source of wellbeing. According to Rodin & Ickovics5° it hasbeen suggested that being involved in multiple roles expands possible resources andrewards, such as different sources of self-esteem and social support. However, it is pointedout that not all roles are good for women, and that the nature and the quality of theexperience within the roles are important factors to consider in relation to women’swellbeing5°. Malley & Steward assume that work and family roles may be sources ofboth strength and stress. One advantage of women having multiple roles is that thedissatisfaction in one role is not as important as a more rewarding role can create abalance. However, it is recognised that there may be a problem, when a new role is added,if the woman is not able to relax the level of expected performance in the various roles9.

Lack of career progress

The glass ceiling .

The workplace is often portrayed as gender neutral by management, but evidencesuggests that gender bias exists, and this bias contributes to working women’s uniquestressors 17. Lack of career progress has been suggested as a major source of work stressfor women and it has been linked to negative health consequences and reducedsatisfaction 13, 14. Women are still not properly integrated in many organisationalsystems 17 , and there is evidence that women face a’glass ceiling’ within the workplace.The glass ceiling refers to a subtle but powerful barrier that limits women’s careeradvancement to top management in big organisations&dquo;,’ . Studies have found that

280

women are less likely to be promoted than men in professions such as engineering andmedicines4,55. In addition, management is male dominated even in traditional female

professions-5’. Davidson & Cooper&dquo; conducted a study with 940 British managers andit was found that women were more likely to work in lower level management comparedto men. Contrary to the Inale managers the female managers were likely to be the firstindividual of her sex to hold that position. Cox & HarquailS7 investigated the relationshipbetween gender, career paths, and career success in 502 female and male MBAs. It wasfound that the female managers and male managers did not differ on overall promotionsand career satisfaction. However, the female managers experienced lower salaryincreases, less management promotions, and lower hierarchical levels in comparison tomale managers with similar education, experience, age, performance and career path5’.However, not all research has found evidence for a glass ceiling effect. Powell &

Butterfield58 examined the role of gender in the promotion (to top management)decisions for US federal government. In contrast to hypotheses, it was found that genderworked to women’s advantage, although the greatest effect upon promotion was anapplicant’s employment in the hiring department5S..

Tlze ‘old boy network’Women are underrepresented in the levels of the organisation where the decisions aremade, and the informal networks where many power transactions occur are often closedto women’. Corporate politics may be specifically stressful for women because of thelack of opportunities to gain experience in the exercise of power and the exclusion fromthe social informal networks’’. Women’s difficulties in finding mentors, their socialisolation, and lack of career advancement have been linked to the incapability to accessthe ’old boy network’ which included activities important for recognition andadvancement in many organisations 17,14,59. Brass-’° conducted a study investigatinggender differences in networks, interaction patterns, and influence in organisations. Itwas found that participants’ positions in interaction networks had a strong associationwith levels of influence. Women were rated as less intluential than men, and were not

well-integrated into men’s networks including the most senior network. In a follow-upit was found that promotions were significantly related to level of inclusion in thedominant interaction networkS21.

Discrimination and stereotypingIn the Supreme Court (in an Amicus Curiare Brief in the case Price Waterhouse v Ann BHopkins) the American Psychological Association 21 stated on the basis of five decadesresearch on sex stereotyping, that evaluation of women’s work performance is commonlyattributed to factors not relating to ability. This has a vital effect upon women’s careerprogress and organisational rewards. Moreover, it was stated that women tend to bepunished when they act in a manner that is viewed as not fitting into sex-relatedexpectations. According to the American Psychological Association-’’ (p. 1063) ’research

281

conducted in the past 15 years has systematically revealed the cognitive structures ofsex stereotypes and the psychological process by which they influence behaviour,including behaviour in the workplace’.

A study investigated stressors and coping in 19 male and 20 female managers inCanada&dquo;. It was found prejudice and discrimination were more often sources of stressamong the female participants than among the male. Similarly, Bhatnagar59 states thatmen and women of comparable competence are not evaluated or rewarded in an equalmanner, rather women tend to be underrated, but it is concluded that further researchis needed in order to investigate the stressful effects of this discrimination. In a studyNlartell, Parker, Emrich, Crawford & Swerdlin&dquo;° investigated sex stereotyping in theperceptions of executives. An executive attribute inventory was developed and theparticipants, 123 male managers, each rated one of four groups - women middle-managers (MMs), men MMs, successful women MMs, and successful men MMs. Sexdifferences were reported on all but one of the attributes, with men being favoured. Theresults provided support for sex stereotyping on the attributes related to successfulexecutives. The authors suggested that the findings help to explain why few womenexecutives exist. It was demonstrated that women in MM are perceived to be lackingwhat is needed to succeed as an executive. This perception may have a negative influenceon performance ratings and promotions&dquo;’. Similarly, Fielden & Cooper’ suggest thatthe belief that women lack what is needed to succeed is often accountable for the

discrimination women managers experience in the workplace. In Davidson et al’s39 study,described earlier, women scored significantly higher than men on the subscale relatingto pressure from discrimination and prejudice. Moreover, when the data was analysedusing multiple regression with job satisfaction and current state of health as dependentvariables it was found that the’pressure from organizational structure and climate’ wasthe strongest predictor variable for the female participants. The authors suggest thatthis finding is in accordance with the problems linked to ‘old boy network’ cultureinherent in many organisations. Hofboll et al 17 propose that there are conflictingexpectations of women in the workplace. On one hand they gain approval if they conveytraditionally female characteristic such as warmth and expressiveness, but on the otherhand they must behave in an individualistic power-centred manner if they want tosucceed professionally 17. In addition, there is still a wage gap between the genders. Lessqualified women earn less than comparably qualified men61, and having lower salarieshas been reported to be a stressor for females 14.

Sexual harassment in the workplace has been identified as a significant job stressorfor woinen&dquo;’. Sexual harassment has been defined as ‘any behaviour of a sexual naturethat an individual perceives to be offensive and unwelcome’12 (p.265). Women reportmore sexual harassment compared to men, and women working in traditionallymasculine occupations are particularly likely to experience this stressed. A study 22investigated sexual harassment experiences, coping and psychological outcomes of 747women employed in the private-sector and at universities. Sexual harassment

282

experiences were measured with The Sexual Experiences Questionnaire, and it was foundthat low-level but frequent experiences of sexual harassment had negative effects onpsychological wellbeing. Multiple-group discriminant function analyses indicatedwomen who had experienced low, moderate and high levels of harassment and thosewho had not experienced any harassment could be ordered on the basis of theirpsychological (mental health index, Post traumatic stress disorder symptoms) and job-related outcomes (job-satisfaction measurements). High levels of harassment wererelated to the worst outcomes, and no harassment was related to least negative outcomes.Interestingly a majority of the women who had experienced harassing behaviour in theworkplace answered’no’to the question asking if they had experienced sexual harassmentat their present workplace 21. Similarly, Morrow, McElroy & Phillips6j found that womenwho had experienced harassing behaviour at work reported higher levels of stress thanwomen who had not.

Work stress and women from ethnic minorities .

There is a lack of research investigating work stress and ethnic minorities~~2‘~.Nevertheless, it has been reported that perceived discrimination is a stressor for

individuals from ethnic minorities&dquo;. Mirrashid i25 compared stress and social supportbetween white women and women from ethnic minorities. The study found nosignificant differences between the two groups in the level of work stress or work/familyconflict. Similarly, white women and minority women experienced the same levels ofperceived co-worker support. However, minority women experienced significantly lowerlevels of organisational suppor t25. Snapp65 interviewed 100 black and 100 whiteprofessional women to explore occupational stress, social support and depression.Women were not randomly selected for the study, rather women were recruited inaccordance to the objective of the study. The interview instrument included both closed-ended and open-ended questions, and depression was measured with ’the Centre forEpidemiological Studies Depression Scale’. The data was analysed using multipleregression and it was found that there were multifaceted differences in occupationalstress levels, social support and depression across race, class, background, supervisorystatus, marital and parental status. For example, it was found that white women reportedmore support from co-workers than black women65.

Implications for practiceAlthough no clear conclusions could be drawn on the basis of the research reviewed inthis paper it may still be relevant to consider implications for practice in relation to thepossible effects of the highlighted stressors, multiple roles, lack of career progress, anddiscrimination and stereotyping.

On the basis of research evidence the HSE 66 has presented new stress managementstandards that recommend good practice in six key stressor areas: demands, control,support, relationships, role, and organisational change. The first step is to conduct a

283

risk assessment of the organisation’s state. In accordance with this approach Nelson &

Hitt67 suggest that in order to develop policies and programmes, aiming to improvewomen’s health, it is important to understand the stressors working women are facing.When conducting HSE risk assessments within organisations it could be useful to alsobe aware of the possible stressors reviewed in this article.

If risk assessments highlight that employees are suffering from any of thesestressors it is important that steps are taken to reduce or eliminate these hazards 68Flexitime within the workplace could allow women and men to deal with home conflictsand thereby reduce the pressure from multiple roles67. Women still have most of theresponsibility for childcare’7. Allowing greater flexibility for both genders couldencourage men to take more responsibility for childcare, therefore reducing stressfor working women and possibly improve the overall quality of family life. Anotheroption could be to introduce more corporate childcare facilities as this could easethe home/work conflict for working parents67. Programmes could be introduced tosupport the practical implementation of equal opportunities policies aiming to reducediscrimination. Such programmes could encourage an open dialogue aboutdiscrimination and highlight the organisation’s commitment to equal opportunities.Moreover, reduction of workplace discrimination would most likely improve careeropportunities for women. Finally, mentoring programmes could be a great sourceof support for working women and, ultimately, help them break through the glassceiling&dquo;.

ConclusionThe current review has presented and evaluated research investigating the role of genderin the level of workplace stress. Moreover, it has reviewed the literature relating to severalstressors reported to be particularly relevant for working women - multiple roles, lackof career progress, and stereotyping and discrimination.

It is important to highlight a number of limitations within the current review andthe field of occupational stress research. The meaning of the concept ’stress’ variedbetween the studies, and this review has adopted the terms as they were used in theindividual articles and chapters. Moreover, it has been suggested that personalitycharacteristics may contribute to the experience of stress’, but this aspect of stress wasnot discussed in this review. Most of the studies used a cross-sectional design and onlyused questionnaires to measure stress. Bogg & Cooper 35 suggest that ideally stressresearch should adopt longitudinal designs involving quantitative (psychological andphysiological measures) and qualitative methods. In addition, several of the studieswere conducted in different countries and it is uncertain to what extent it is possible togeneralise these findings between countries. Another issue that has been highlighted isthat there are difficulties making appropriate gender comparisons in work stressresearch, as males often hold more senior positions than females&dquo;. Furthermore, thereis an imbalance in the level of attention various groups of working women have received

284

from researchers; with women from ethnic minorities receiving little attention24, andfemale managers receiving a lot. I.,

In conclusion many of the studies suggested that gender played an important rolein the level of work stress, with women experiencing higher levels of stress than men.However, several of the studies and reviews suggested that gender was not an importantfactor in the level of workplace stress. Moreover, the quality of the studies and the abilityto generalise from the studies varied greatly on both sides of the argument. Consequently,considering the evidence presented in the current review, it is impossible to draw anyfirm conclusions regarding the role of gender in the level of workplace stress. Theliterature concerning stressors suggested that multiple roles, lack of career progress,and discrimination and stereotyping were more common for women than for men, andhad a negative impact upon women in particular. However, it is important to highlightthat the research was not conclusive regarding the negative effects of these stressors.Finally, it may be useful if further variables are considered in future research/reviewsexamining the role of gender in workplace stress. Variables that may be important toconsider include occupation, education, ethnicity, culture, age, socioeconomic group,social support, rank, personality variables, family roles and responsibilities.

References .

1 Health and Safety Executive. Health and Safety Statistics Highlights. Retrieved 10May 2004, from www.hse.gov.uk/statistivs/overall/hss0102pdf, 2001/2002.

2 Health and Safety Executive. Tackling Work-Related Stress: A Manager’s Guide toImproving and Maintaining Employee Health and Well-being. Suffolk: HSE, 2001.

3 Cooper CL, Dewe PJ, O’Driscoll MP. Organizational Stress: A Review and Critique ofTheory, Research and Applications. London: Sage Publications, 2001.

4 Briner RB, Harris C, Daniels K. How do work stress and coping work? Toward afundamental theoretical reappraisal. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 1990:32: 223-234.

5 Palmer S. Stress management and prevention programmes. In: R Wolfe, W Dryden,S Strawbridge (Eds), Handbook of Counselling Psychology (pp.536-551). London:Sage, 2003.

6 Palmer S, Cooper C, Thomas K. Creating a Balance: Managing Stress. London: TheBritish Library, 2003..

7 Fielden S, Cooper CL. Managerial stress: Are women more at risk? In: DL Nelson, RJBurke (Eds), Gender, Work Stress, and Health (pp. 19-34). Washington: AmericanPsychological Association, 2002.

8 Baruch GK, Biener L, Barnett RC. Women and Gender in Research on Work and

Family Stress. American Psychologist, 1987: 42: 130-136.9 Malley JE, Stewart AJ. Women’s work and family roles: Sources of stress and sources

of strength. In: S Fisher, J Reason (Eds), Handbook of Life Stress: Cognition and Health(pp.175-190). Essex, UK: John Wiley & Sons, 1988.

285

10 Repetti RL, Matthews KA, Waldron I. Employment and women’s health: Effects ofpaid employment on women’s mental and physical health. American Psychologist,1989: 44: 1394-1401.

11 Jick TD, Mitz LF. Sex differences in work stress. Academy of Management Review,1985: 10: 408-420.

12 Martocchio JJ, O’Leary AM. Sex differences in occupational stress: A meta-analyticreview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1989: 74: 495-501.

13 Nelson D, Campbell Quick J, Hitt MA, Moesel D. Politics, lack of career progress, andwork/home conflict: Stress and strain for working women. Sex Roles, 1990: 23: 169-183.

14 Nelson DL, Quick JC. Professional women: Are distress and disease inevitable?Academy of Management Review, 1985: 10: 206-218.

15 Decker P, Borgen FH (1993). Dimensions of work appraisal: Stress, strain, coping,job satisfaction, and negative affectivity. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 1993:40: 470-478.

16 McDonald LM, Korabik K. Sources of stress and ways of coping among male andfemale managers. Journal of Social Behaviour and Personality, 1991: 6: 185-198.

17 Hotboll SE, Geller P, Dunahoo C. Women’s coping: Communal versus individualorientation. In: MJ Schabracq, JAM Winburst, CL Cooper (Eds), The Handbook ofWork and Health Psychology (pp.237-258). Wiltshire: John Wiley & Sons, 2003.

18 Etzion D. Moderating effect of social support on the stress-burnout relationship.Journal of Applied Psychology, 1984: 69: 615-622.

19 Burke RJ. Work experiences, stress and health among managerial women: Researchand practice. In: MJ Schabracq, JAM Winburst, CL Cooper (Eds), The Handbook ofWork and Health Psychology (pp.259-278). Wiltshire: John Wiley & Sons, 2003.

20 Brass DJ. Men’s and women’s networks: A study of interaction patterns and influencein an organization. Academy of Management Journal, 1985: 28: 327-343.

21 American Psychological Association. In the Supreme Court of the United States, PriceWaterhouse v Ann, B. Hopkins. American Psychologist, 1991: 46: 1061-1070.

22 Schneider KT, Fitzgerald LF, Swan S. Job-related and psychological effects of sexualharassment in the workplace: Empirical evidence from two organizations. Journalof Applied Psychology, 1997: 82: 401-415.

23 Burke RJ. Men, masculinity, and health. In: DL Nelson, RJ Burke (Eds), Gender, WorkStress, and Health (pp.35-55). Washington: American Psychological Association,2002.

24 Kelly-Radford L. Diversity. Retrieved 10 May 2004, from www.cdc.gov/niosh/stress,1999.

25 Mirrashidi T. Integrating work and family: Stress, social support and well-beingamong ethnically diverse working women. Dissertation Abstracts International, 1999:60(5-B): 2355.

26 Beehr TA, O’Hara K. Methodological designs for the evaluation of occupational stress

286

interventions. In: SV Kasl, CL Cooper (Eds), Research Methods in Stress and HealthPsychology (pp.79-112). Chichester: Wiley, 1987.

27 Deaux K. From individual differences to social categories: Analysis of a decade’sresearch on gender. American Psychologist, 1984: 39: 105-116.

28 Health and Safety Executive. The Scale of Occupational Stress: The Bristol Stress andHealth at Work Study. Sudbury: HSE, 2000.

29 Health and Safety Executive. The Scale of Occupational Stress: A Further Analysis ofthe Impact of Semographic Factors and Type of Job. Retrieved 10 May 2004, fromwww.hse.gov.uk, 2000.

30 Kivimaki M, Vahtera J, Pentti J, Ferrie JE. Factors underlying the effect oforganisational downsizing on health of employees: Longitudinal cohort study. BritishMedical Journal, 2000: 320: 971-975.

31 Health and Safety Executive. Work Related Factors and Ill Health: The Whitehall IIStudy. Sudbury: HSE, 2000.

32 Spielberger CD, Reheiser EC. The job stress survey: Measuring gender differences inoccupational stress. Journal of Social Behaviour and Personality, 1994: 9: 199-218.

33 Antoniou ASG, Davidson MJ, Cooper CL. Occupational stress, job satisfaction andhealth state and male and female junior doctors in Greece. Journal of ManagerialPsychology, 2003: 18: 592-621.

34 Di Salvo V, Lubbers C, Rossi AM, Lewis J. Unstructured perceptions of work-relatedstress: An exploratory qualitative study. In: R Crandall, PL Perrewe (Eds),Occupational Stress: A Handbook (pp.39-50). Washington: Taylor Francis, 1995.

35 Bogg J, Cooper CL. An examination of gender differences for job satisfaction, mentalhealth, and occupational stress among senior UK civil servants. International Journalof Stress Management, 1994: 1: 159-172.

36 Jenkins D, Palmer S. Job stress in National Health Service managers: A qualitativeexploration of the stressor-strain-health relationship. The ’fit’ and ’unfit’ manager.International Journal of Health Promotion & Education, 2004: 42: 48-63.

37 Gardiner M, Tiggemann M. Gender differences in leadership style, job stress andmental health in male- and female-dominated industries. Journal of Occupationaland Organizational Psychology, 1999: 72: 301-315.

38 Davidson MJ, Cooper CL. Occupational stress in female managers: A comparativestudy. Journal of Management Studies, 1984: 21: 185-205.

39 Davidson, MJ, Cooper CL, Baldini V. Occupational stress in female and male graduatemanagers. Stress Medicine, 1995: 11: 157-175.

40 Kirkcaldy B, Brown J, Furnham A, Trimpop R. Job stress and dissatisfaction:Comparing male and female medical practitioners and auxiliary personnel. EuropeanReview of Applied Psychology, 2002: 52: 51-61.

41 Bremer CF. Impact of a mentoring program on occupational stress, personal strain,and coping resources if newly appointed United States magistrate judges. DissertationAbstract International, 2003: 63(12-A): 4185.

287

42 Bacharach S, Bamberger P. Casual models of role stressor antecedents andconsequences: The importance of occupational differences. Journal of VocationalBehaviour, 1992: 4: 13-35.

43 Miller K, Greyling M, Cooper C, Lu L, Sparks K, Spector PE. Occupational stress andgender: A cross-cultural study. Stress Medicine, 2000: 16: 271-278.

44 Swanson V, Power K, Simpson R. A comparison of stress and job satisfaction in femaleand male GPs and consultants. Stress Medicine, 1998: 12: 17-26.

45 Wiley MG, Eskilson A. Gender and family/career conflict: Reactions of bosses. SexRoles, 1988: 19: 445-464.

46 Duxbury LE, Higgins CA. Gender differences in work-family conflict. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 1991: 76: 60-74.

47 Nelson DL, Burke RJ. A framework for examining gender, work stress and health. In:DL Nelson, RJ Burke (Eds), Gender, Work Stress, and Health (pp.3-18). Washington:American Psychological Association, 2002.

48 Reskin B, Padavic I. Women and Men at Work. USA: Pine Forge Press, 1994.49 Voydanoff P. Women, work, and family. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 1988: 12:

269-280.

50 Rodin J, Ickovics R. Women’s Health. American Psychologist, 1990: 45: 1018-1043.51 Langan-Fox J. Women’s careers and occupational stress. International review of

Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1998: 13: 273-302.52 Greenglass ER, Pantony KL, Burke RJ. A gender-role perspective on role conflict,

work stress and social support. Journal of Social Behaviour and Personality, 1988: 3:317-328.

53 Morrison AM, Von Glinow MA (1990). Women and minorities in management.American Psychologist, 1990: 45: 200-208.

54 Benokratis NV. Subtle Sexism: Current Practice and Prospects for Change. ThousandOaks, Canada: Sage, 1997.

55 Tesch BJ, Wood HM, Helwig AL, Nattinger AB. Promotion of women physicians inacademic medicine. Glass ceiling or sticky floor? The Journal of the American MedicalAssociation, 1995: 273: 1022-1025.

56 Powell GN. Women and Men in Management. Newbury Park, Canada: Sage, 1988.57 Cox TH, Harquail CV. Career paths and career success in the early stages of male and

female MBAs. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 1991: 39: 54-75.58 Powell GN, Butterfield DA (1994). Investigating the glass ceiling phenomenon: An

empirical study of actual promotions to top management. Academy of ManagementJournal, 1994: 37: 68-86.

59 Bhatnagar D. Professional women in organizations: New Paradigms for Researchand Action. Sex Roles, 1988: 18: 343-355.

60 Martell RF, Parker C, Emrich CG, Crawford MS, Swerdlin M. Sex stereotyping in theexecutive suite: ’Much ado about something’. Journal of Social Behaviour andPersonality, 1998: 13: 127-138.

288

61 Economic and Social Research Council. Mothers on the run: Despite more hours atwork, there’s always more to do at home. Retrieved 10 April 2005, from http://www.esrc.ac.uk/esrccontent/news/feb05-5.asp, 2005.

62 Bowes-Sperry L, Tata J. A multi-perspective framework of sexual harassment.Reviewing two decades of research. In: GN Powell (Ed), Handbook of Gender andWork (pp.263-280). Thousand Oaks, Canada: Sage, 1999.

63 Morrow PC, McElroy JC, Phillips CM. Sexual harassment behaviours and work relatedperceptions and attitudes. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 1994: 45: 295-309.

64 James K. Social identity, work stress and minorities worker’s health. In: GP Keita, JJHurrell (Eds), Job Stress in a Changing Workforce: Investigating Gender; Diversity,and Family Issues (pp.127-145). Washington, DC: American PsychologicalAssociation, 1994.

65 Snapp MB. Occupational stress, social support, and depression among Black andWhite professional-managerial women. Women & Health, 1992: 18: 41-79.

66 Cousins R, Mackay CJ, Clarke SD, Kelly C, Kelly P, McCaig RH. Management standardsand work-related stress in the UK: Practical developments. Work & Stress, 2004: 18:

113-136.

67 Nelson DL, Hitt MA. Employed women and stress: Implications for enhancingwomen’s mental health in the workplace. In: JC Quick, LR Murphy, JJ Hurrell (Eds),Stress and Well-Being at Work: Assessments and Improvements for OccupationalMental Health (pp.164-176). USA: American Psychological Association, 1992.

68 Palmer S. Whistle-stop tour of the theory and practice of stress management: Itspossible role in postgraduate health promotion. Health Education Journal, 2003:62(2): 133-142.